Dupliicate check #s

[Bernie Cosell]

r49.29 -- I use online billpay a lot and a funny thing happened: after it
made it to 9999 it seems to have wrapped to 5000 and is now colliding with
my *actual* checks that began at 5000. can quicken not handle five-digit
check #s? I'm not sure what to do.

I rarely use paper checks. The last I used in the previous numbering was
1697 on 2/2/2001! The next check I wrote was #5001 on 12/6/2023,
And my online has now collided with it. Is there any way I can fix this
problem??

/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
ber...@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep <--

[John Pollard]

On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 11:42:04 AM UTC-5, Bernie Cosell wrote:
> r49.29 -- I use online billpay a lot and a funny thing happened: after it
> made it to 9999 it seems to have wrapped to 5000 and is now colliding
> with my *actual* checks that began at 5000.

Doesn't sound like "wrapping" to me:
I would have expected the next check#
after 9999 to be 1, if the numbers were "wrapping".
Otherwise I would have expected the next check# to be 10,000.

> can quicken not handle five-digit check #s?

Yes, Quicken can handle five-digit check #s.

But even if Quicken could not,
I would have expected to see 1000 in Quicken (truncating the final zero).
Or 0000 (dropping the leading 1).
It's hard to imagine how whatever actual check# followed 9999
could have become 5000 under any legitimate process designed to deal
with numbers that were "too large" to handle.

More importantly,
why do you assume that Quicken is the primary cause of what you're seeing?

Have you asked your bill payer what they do after their
billpay check numbers reach 9999?

> I'm not sure what to do.
>
> I rarely use paper checks. The last I used in the previous numbering was
> 1697 on 2/2/2001! The next check I wrote was #5001 on 12/6/2023,
> And my online has now collided with it.

Is there any way I can fix this problem??

That depends.
First I think it might help if you supplied some additional information.
- Financial institution (bill payer) name?
- Payment account type?
- Quicken "Connection Method"
("Online Services" tab of the "Edit Account Details" dialog for the Q account)?

The first thing I suggest you do is to save the results of the download containing
the problematic data.
I would create a new temporary backup folder and use Windows to copy your .QDF file there.
I would also (in your current Quicken file) go to Help > Contact Support > Log files, open the
"OFX Log" and use the "Save as" button to create a text file of the OFX Log contents ... in the same
new temporary folder where you made the Windows copy of your log file.

[Zaidy036]

I have check number problem also but I found it was caused by my bank
(Wells Fargo) only downloading the last three digits even though on
their web site all could be seen in the activity listing. So I have to
manually enter the full number while I am accepting a download.

[Bernie Cosell]

John Pollard <8plu...@gmail.com> wrote:

} On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 11:42:04?AM UTC-5, Bernie Cosell wrote:
} > r49.29 -- I use online billpay a lot and a funny thing happened: after it
} > made it to 9999 it seems to have wrapped to 5000 and is now colliding
} > with my *actual* checks that began at 5000.
}
} Doesn't sound like "wrapping" to me:
} I would have expected the next check#
} after 9999 to be 1, if the numbers were "wrapping".
} Otherwise I would have expected the next check# to be 10,000.

What I've learned is that this isn't a quicken matter, but a *bank* matter.
Apparently with online billpay the *bank* issues the check number and my
@#$%@#$ bank started numbering at 9000 and when it got to 9999 they then
jumped to 5000, which is where my paper checks are.

I just called my bank and got the online-quicken check # reset to 1000.
I'll find out in a while if that worked, but that should give me a long
time before there's trouble.

[NB if there *is* trouble, it'd mean that I've done 5000 [9000-9999] and
1000-4999] but now that I understand the problem I can intercede in time
and get my bank to restart at 6000 -- that'll leave me with room for 1000
handwritten checks and I do about 3/yr so I think that'll last me :o)]

What I actually did was pay the few bills I had with paper checks and so
I'll get no more "collisions" and I hope that it'll all quiet down.

[Bernie Cosell]

Bernie Cosell <ber...@fantasyfarm.com> wrote:

} John Pollard <8plu...@gmail.com> wrote:
}
} } On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 11:42:04?AM UTC-5, Bernie Cosell wrote:
} } > r49.29 -- I use online billpay a lot and a funny thing happened: after it
} } > made it to 9999 it seems to have wrapped to 5000 and is now colliding
} } > with my *actual* checks that began at 5000.
} }
} } Doesn't sound like "wrapping" to me:
} } I would have expected the next check#
} } after 9999 to be 1, if the numbers were "wrapping".
} } Otherwise I would have expected the next check# to be 10,000.
}
} What I've learned is that this isn't a quicken matter, but a *bank* matter.
} Apparently with online billpay the *bank* issues the check number and my
} @#$%@#$ bank started numbering at 9000 and when it got to 9999 they then
} jumped to 5000, which is where my paper checks are.
}
} I just called my bank and got the online-quicken check # reset to 1000.
} I'll find out in a while if that worked, but that should give me a long
} time before there's trouble.

Just for the record, this is wells-fargo... if you're a w-f customer be
careful if you get near 9999

[John Pollard]

On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 12:52:06 PM UTC-5, Bernie Cosell wrote:
> Bernie Cosell wrote:

>
> } John Pollard wrote:
> }
> } } On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 11:42:04?AM UTC-5, Bernie Cosell wrote:
> } } > r49.29 -- I use online billpay a lot and a funny thing happened: after it
> } } > made it to 9999 it seems to have wrapped to 5000 and is now colliding
> } } > with my *actual* checks that began at 5000.

> } } Doesn't sound like "wrapping" to me:
> } } I would have expected the next check#
> } } after 9999 to be 1, if the numbers were "wrapping".
> } } Otherwise I would have expected the next check# to be 10,000.

> } What I've learned is that this isn't a quicken matter, but a *bank* matter.
> } Apparently with online billpay the *bank* issues the check number and my
> } @#$%@#$ bank started numbering at 9000 and when it got to 9999 they then
> } jumped to 5000, which is where my paper checks are.

> } I just called my bank and got the online-quicken check # reset to 1000.

So that's not going to conflict with any of your old check numbers?

[Earlier you said,

"The last I used in the previous numbering was 1697 on 2/2/2001!"

I assumed that meant you had probably used check numbers much lower
than 1000.]

Or maybe you did not record those old check transactions in Quicken.

> } I'll find out in a while if that worked, but that should give me a long
> } time before there's trouble.

> Just for the record, this is wells-fargo...
> if you're a w-f customer be careful if you get near 9999

I assumed it was likely the billpayer's issue:
in my experience it is the billpayer who controls
the billpay check numbers.
I was going to suggest having the billpayer change
their "next" check number, once it was clear it was their
issue.

The alternative might have been to close your old account, then
open a new account where you could specify your starting check#.

[Kobac]

On 05/06/2023 12:41, Bernie Cosell wrote:
> r49.29 -- I use online billpay a lot and a funny thing happened: after it
> made it to 9999 it seems to have wrapped to 5000 and is now colliding with
> my *actual* checks that began at 5000. can quicken not handle five-digit
> check #s? I'm not sure what to do.
>
> I rarely use paper checks. The last I used in the previous numbering was
> 1697 on 2/2/2001! The next check I wrote was #5001 on 12/6/2023,
> And my online has now collided with it. Is there any way I can fix this
> problem??
>
> /Bernie\

My bank (Webster Bank) does not use check numbers when using their
online Bill Pay system, which I use by logging into my bank account and
making payments. I do not make the payments directly from Quicken but
merely record those Bill Pay payments in Quicken manually as EFTs.

I rarely use paper checks either.

[Andrew]

On 6/21/2023 4:27 PM, Kobac wrote:
> My bank (Webster Bank) does not use check numbers when using their
> online Bill Pay system, which I use by logging into my bank account and
> making payments.

What happens if your credit union has to cut ?& mail a physical check
for a payee that does not accept ACH transmitted electronic payments?
The paper check indeed DOES have a check number assigned, which shows up
in the DOWNLOADED PAYEE field when I accept the cleared payment. I
don't ever need to manually write it in the CHECK # field in the
register, but indeed it does still exist in these cases.

When I enter these payments in my register when I tell the CU to make
the payment, I simply record the check # as 'BILLPAY' regardless of
whether the CU (or their agent such as CHECKFREE that I believe they
use) goes ACH or physical. I don't know how they do it, nor do I care
unless I really get into the weeds and see how my payee is set up in
their system.

--

-----------------------------------------------------------
Regards -

- Andrew

[Kobac]

I do very occasionally run into that situation where a paper check is
sent out to the payee. I record it as an EFT. On our bank statement
those payments show up as a debit with no check number.

[Andrew]

I'm discussing this only since I'm interested in the payment methodology
process, not to bust your chops or belabor any point, please know this.

Do you get a chance to look at the paper copy via your bank online
account? My CU typically has a link to what the actual check looks like
online. If not, might be interesting for you to pay yourself $1 and see
what to looks like when you receive the real check in the mail. You
still might see a check number!

And yes, your EFT in the register mirrors my BILLPAY category.

[John Pollard]

FWIW

In my experience with two different financial institutions, the usefulness of online billpay check numbers appears to depend on the specific online biller.

At Bank of America; when an online bill was paid by check, the check# that appeared in the Quicken transaction bore no relationship to the check# that appeared on the physical check. In my BofA statements, those online billpay checks were not included with my manual checks, but with my "Withdrawals" ... and the "check#" was not displayed.
[Also, those checks appear to have been written on non-Bank of America accounts - such as Wells Fargo and Northern Trust for example.]

At USAA; when an online bill was paid by check, the check# that appeared in the Quicken transaction was exactly the same as the check# that appeared on the physical check. Those checks were written on my USAA checking account, and they appeared in the "Checks" section of my statement with the same check number that was on the actual check (and downloaded to Quicken).

[Andrew]

Yes, my CU is exactly the same as your USAA. Perhaps the OP's mirrors
the BA process.

[John Pollard]

On Friday, June 23, 2023 at 12:52:11 PM UTC-5, John Pollard wrote:

> FWIW
>
> In my experience with two different financial institutions, the usefulness of online billpay check numbers appears to depend on the specific online biller.
>
> At Bank of America; when an online bill was paid by check, the check# that appeared in the Quicken transaction bore no relationship to the check# that appeared on the physical check. In my BofA statements, those online billpay checks were not included with my manual checks, but with my "Withdrawals" ... and the "check#" was not displayed.
> [Also, those checks appear to have been written on non-Bank of America accounts - such as Wells Fargo and Northern Trust for example.]
>
> At USAA; when an online bill was paid by check, the check# that appeared in the Quicken transaction was exactly the same as the check# that appeared on the physical check. Those checks were written on my USAA checking account, and they appeared in the "Checks" section of my statement with the same check number that was on the actual check (and downloaded to Quicken).

I forgot to mention: USAA used online billpay check numbers starting with 95001. Which pretty much precluded any manual check numbers from overlapping.

[Kobac]

I zeroed in online on the last such payment that I made—back in November
2021!—and when I looked, all I saw was that it was classified as a
debit, not a check. The only "number" listed was "CKFXXXXX" followed by
a four-digit number and then the letters "POS." Looking further back in
March and January of 2020, I saw the same character string; the four
digit number and the remainder of the string remained the same in each case.

[Kobac]

On 06/23/2023 12:32, Andrew wrote:

To further clarify, my bank allows drill-down to see a copy of the
physical checks that *I* write. For the online Bill Pay payments that
resulted in a physical check being mailed to the payee, no such
drill-down copy is available.

[Andrew]

On 6/24/2023 2:39 PM, Kobac wrote:
> no such drill-down copy is available.

Time for a new bank! :-)
(I'm kidding to be clear)

[Kobac]

On 06/25/2023 08:53, Andrew wrote:
> On 6/24/2023 2:39 PM, Kobac wrote:
>> no such drill-down copy is available.
> Time for a new bank! :-)
> (I'm kidding to be clear)

If *I* didn't write the check, I really don't care what the check number
is. ;D

I send almost all of my payments via the payee's own website. It takes
more time to visit each site, but it also assures me that the payee
received the payment and on time (no third-party involvement—I had a bad
experience many years ago with that) and also I can see any messages or
other info on the site.

[Andrew]

On 6/25/2023 10:11 AM, Kobac wrote:
> I send almost all of my payments via the payee's own website.

That's most interesting. I would think that would take a lot of time
and effort, since I know each site's panels to do so are unique. I have
about 55 active vendors in my electronic paylist via my CUs electronic
check system, so to pay each of those uniquely would be very burdensome
to me.

But I do appreciate what you are saying about a bad situation you had in
the past. I recall I might have had a payment missed or something to
that effect, but it very rarely occurs and I'm willing to take that risk
personally.

I try never to argue with how someone manages their finances in the
electronic format. Unless of course people enter a split payment when
paying a credit card to record categories in a Quicken register! :-)

[Kobac]

55 vendors? Wow. I have maybe 15 or so. Most of my transactions go
through my credit cards so that's why I have so few to pay—I just pay
the credit card and it takes care of them all in one fell swoop.

I record each credit card charge separately on the day of the charge
because I like to keep track of when the charge was made, not when the
credit card bill is paid.

The snafu I had was a long time ago and it was with Checkfree through
Intuit. This was in the early days of electronic payments and some of
the vendors did not process them in a timely fashion—some big companies
too like Marine Midland and Capital One (the one I had the worst problem
with). As a consequence, I incurred numerous late charges, which I
protested. Most of them I got reversed. After writing letters and making
phone calls, I got tired of the hassle and canceled the service. This
was all back in the late 90s.

[John Pollard]

On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 1:35:46 PM UTC-5, Kobac wrote:

> I zeroed in online on the last such payment that I made—back in November
> 2021!—and when I looked, all I saw was that it was classified as a
> debit, not a check. The only "number" listed was "CKFXXXXX" followed by
> a four-digit number and then the letters "POS." Looking further back in
> March and January of 2020, I saw the same character string; the four
> digit number and the remainder of the string remained the same in each case.

Sorry, it's a little late to be responding to this; but I happened to be perusing this discussion
and a possible explanation for your result occurred to me.

There is a process available where a check presented to a vendor, can be immediately "converted" to a debit,
as if it had been a charge on your debit card. Perhaps that's what happened to you.

I have heard the process referred to as "debitizing" the check.

It's good for the vendor because they can immediately determine that the check is good,
and they can receive the funds as soon as they would have had the payment been made
with a debit card.
No fuss collecting checks together, filling out deposit slips, submitting to the bank,
and waiting for the process to complete.